I saw a quote in (I think) Recording magazine in an ad... something
like "This is the cleanest mixer I have ever heard". It was a Mackie
ad, with the quote being from Kevin Eubanks.

Maybe it *is* a really clean board, but I would think something like a
Millennia Media Mixing Suite would be a lot cleaner.

Maybe Kevin "doesn't get out a lot"?

Well, I don't know about that, but, boy, if it was endorsed by BOB
Eubanks...

In article .com writes:

I saw a quote in (I think) Recording magazine in an ad... something
like "This is the cleanest mixer I have ever heard". It was a Mackie
ad, with the quote being from Kevin Eubanks.

Maybe it *is* a really clean board, but I would think something like a
Millennia Media Mixing Suite would be a lot cleaner.

I just used one last weekend to do some "eyes only" (no headphones)
recordings and ended up clipping the mic preamps. I know it was the
mixer clipping because I connected the recording outputs (straight out
of the preamps) to the HDR24/96 inputs with nothing but cable in
between, and the maximum ouptut level of the Onyx recording outputs
(or any outputs, for that matter, except for the main outputs on the
1220) is lower than what it takes to get to full scale on the
recorder. But what's there is nice and clean unitl it clips.

It's my fault, of course. I was just keeping a partial eye on the
channel's level indicators and saw a red one flash occasionally, but
not often enough to worry me. It will, now, however.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Mike Rivers wrote:

writes:

I saw a quote in (I think) Recording magazine in an ad... something
like "This is the cleanest mixer I have ever heard". It was a Mackie
ad, with the quote being from Kevin Eubanks.

Maybe it *is* a really clean board, but I would think something like a
Millennia Media Mixing Suite would be a lot cleaner.

I just used one last weekend to do some "eyes only" (no headphones)
recordings and ended up clipping the mic preamps. I know it was the
mixer clipping because I connected the recording outputs (straight out
of the preamps) to the HDR24/96 inputs with nothing but cable in
between, and the maximum ouptut level of the Onyx recording outputs
(or any outputs, for that matter, except for the main outputs on the
1220) is lower than what it takes to get to full scale on the
recorder. But what's there is nice and clean unitl it clips.

Headroom, or lack of it, has been the bane of the Mackies all along. But
you already knew that.

It's my fault, of course. I was just keeping a partial eye on the
channel's level indicators and saw a red one flash occasionally, but
not often enough to worry me. It will, now, however.

We've all been there, and sometimes with far more costly gear, too. g

--
ha

Mike Rivers wrote:

except for the main outputs on the 1220) is lower than what it takes to
get to full scale on the recorder.

So even the pros can do that... I learned that lesson a couple of days
ago. The school class, remember? One phrase clipped at -5.6 dBFS. Took a
while to figure that one out, but I now understand a little bit more
about matching inputs to outputs and that the preamp setting that says
+4dBu on the output is not the setting to use even though the recorders
reference is +4dBu... The preamps max "undistorted" output is +15dBu and
my recorders max "undistorted" input is +22 dBu. I take it this is
0dBFS.

Anyway (and off topic), thanks for your comment about the children
beeing on a patience clock. You've done this before it seems...:-) We
were prepared. All came out well except for that clipped phrase where I
have alternatives.

regards
Lars

--
lars farm // http://www.farm.se
lars is also a mail-account on the server farm.se
aim:

On 21 May 2005 07:23:51 -0700, wrote:

I saw a quote in (I think) Recording magazine in an ad... something
like "This is the cleanest mixer I have ever heard". It was a Mackie
ad, with the quote being from Kevin Eubanks.

Maybe it *is* a really clean board, but I would think something like a
Millennia Media Mixing Suite would be a lot cleaner.

Maybe Kevin "doesn't get out a lot"?

It's an ad fer chrissakes... he got paid.

Lars Farm wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:

except for the main outputs on the 1220) is lower than what it takes
to get to full scale on the recorder.

So even the pros can do that... I learned that lesson a couple of days
ago. The school class, remember? One phrase clipped at -5.6 dBFS.
Took a while to figure that one out, but I now understand a little
bit more about matching inputs to outputs and that the preamp setting
that says +4dBu on the output is not the setting to use even though
the recorders reference is +4dBu... The preamps max "undistorted"
output is +15dBu and my recorders max "undistorted" input is +22 dBu.
I take it this is 0dBFS.

If the recorder can only be set to accept full scale at +22dbu, then the
recorder design is at fault, imo. +22db is quite a large signal. There
is little practical reason for signals to be transferred at this level
with a decent equipment set-up. A couple of volts should be all that is
nessesary.

From a technical point of view, its nails down a blackboard for me to
put out voltages too close to the power supply rails.

Kevin Aylward

http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

In article writes:

Headroom, or lack of it, has been the bane of the Mackies all along. But
you already knew that.

Internal headroom has been a problem, but this was simply a matter of
me not setting the gain low enough.

Indicators (metering) is another Mackie problem. The channel meters
offer a couple more lights than just a single overload light, but that
tends to build false confidence. There's 20 dB between the green light
and the yellow light, and 20 dB between the yellow light and the red
light, and about a half a dB between the red light and clipping, the
guideline of "don't ever let the red light come on" is the way to go.
Problem is that you don't know how yellow the yellow light is.

Obviously in this case a limiter or compressor wouldn't have helped
since it was the preamp itself that was clipping, not the recorder.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

If the recorder can only be set to accept full scale at +22dbu, then the
recorder design is at fault, imo. +22db is quite a large signal. There
is little practical reason for signals to be transferred at this level
with a decent equipment set-up. A couple of volts should be all that is
nessesary.

Ah, the words of an IC designer. The problem is that signal levels on
that order are a standard in professional studio equipment that we've
held on to for 50 years. In the '80's, TASCAM introduced the
"semi-pro" -10 dBV nominal operating level so that they could provide
sufficient (at least 20 dB) headroom at sort of acceptable distortion
levels with the ICs available at the time. While this made functional
studio gear available to more people because of the lower cost, it
made for a lot of headaches when interfacing to existing studio
equipment.

If you build (or can specify) the complete system, you can work with
whatever levels you choose, but if you have to interface with things
that others have designed, you have to be aware of the real world
gozintas and gozoutas. But then this is consistent with your "preamp
problem."

I do, however, agree that a recorder without an input level control is
a faulty design, but it seems that this is the way the wind has been
blowing for many years. It's created system engineering issues for us.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Kevin Aylward wrote:

If the recorder can only be set to accept full scale at +22dbu, then the
recorder design is at fault, imo. +22db is quite a large signal.

Well, the pre can deliver +21 dBu "undistorted" which is close enough,
but then it must be set to do that. I hadn't.

One question that pops up though is: what is this "undistorted" property
that both recorder and pre talks about? Seems to me they consider
everything that hasn't clipped as "undistorted". What about just below
"undistorted" is it as good as 10dB under "undistorted", 20dB...?

L


--
lars farm // http://www.farm.se
lars is also a mail-account on the server farm.se
aim:

Lars Farm wrote:
One question that pops up though is: what is this "undistorted" property
that both recorder and pre talks about? Seems to me they consider
everything that hasn't clipped as "undistorted". What about just below
"undistorted" is it as good as 10dB under "undistorted", 20dB...?

One of the more useful pieces of information you can have about a piece
of equipment is a plot of average distortion vs. operating level.

On a lot of gear, you _will_ find that the distortion increases a lot
before you get to the clipping point (and the older Mackie consoles are
big offenders). On the other hand, on some gear you will find that the
lowest distortion is at high levels right below the clipping point (and
there are a few preamps like this... the INA103 chip is this way too).

On SOME gear, you'll find the distortion (and usually the coloration)
is pretty constant with level. I like that a lot.

Personally, I like to say "10 dB under clipping" and I like to measure
clipping as the point where either a 1 KHz sine wave starts to sound
funny or look funny on the scope. (I find I can hear it go buzzy at
about 2% THD and it looks flat-topped on the scope at about 3% THD).
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Mike Rivers wrote:

I do, however, agree that a recorder without an input level control is
a faulty design, but it seems that this is the way the wind has been
blowing for many years. It's created system engineering issues for us.

Simulation showed that no such input level control was necessary, as the
paper preamp didn't put out enough signal to clip dry grass.

--
ha

Mike Rivers wrote:

I just used one last weekend to do some "eyes only" (no headphones)
recordings and ended up clipping the mic preamps. I know it was the
mixer clipping because I connected the recording outputs (straight out
of the preamps) to the HDR24/96 inputs with nothing but cable in
between, and the maximum ouptut level of the Onyx recording outputs
(or any outputs, for that matter, except for the main outputs on the
1220) is lower than what it takes to get to full scale on the
recorder. But what's there is nice and clean unitl it clips.

And at under $83 per mic channel (under $69 per on the 1640) I think
I'll keep mine.

Have you ever tried the new Onyx mixer? It is very clean.

On 21 May 2005 07:23:51 -0700, wrote:

I saw a quote in (I think) Recording magazine in an ad... something
like "This is the cleanest mixer I have ever heard". It was a Mackie
ad, with the quote being from Kevin Eubanks.

Maybe it *is* a really clean board, but I would think something like a
Millennia Media Mixing Suite would be a lot cleaner.

Maybe Kevin "doesn't get out a lot"?

I heard he does endorse certain strains of HQ pot! That may be why he
doesn't get out much.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades